Wednesday, March 20, 2013

With the re-election of President Barack Obama, who will likely appoint more liberal Supreme Court justices opposed to the protection of private property rights, there is little chance Kelo will be overturned by the Supreme Court in the near future. Fortunately, although an unelected group of five judges has chosen to ignore the plain words of the U.S. Constitution and dictate public policy, state legislatures and the ballot initiative process are providing an effective way for the people to fight back and protect their rights.

LANGUAGE
OF QUESTION 1Shall
Section 11 of Article I (Bill of Rights) of the Constitution of
Virginia be amended (i) to require that eminent domain only be
exercised where the property taken or damaged is for public use and,
except for utilities or the elimination of a public nuisance, not
where the primary use is for private gain, private benefit, private
increasing jobs, increasing tax revenue, or economic development;
(ii) to define what is included in just compensation for such taking
or damaging of property; and (iii) to prohibit the taking or damaging
of more private property than is necessary for the public use?

On
November 6, 2012, voters in Virginia said they’d had enough of
government seizing private property for questionable purposes, as 74%
voted to approve a ballot initiative limiting eminent domain.
Question 1 amended Virginia’s constitution to curtail state and
local governments from arbitrarily seizing private property. Private
property can now only be taken for a true “public use;” it cannot
be taken simply to give it to another private landowner such as a
developer for the primary purpose of creating jobs, increasing tax
revenue or economic development. The only exceptions are for
utilities or to eliminate a public nuisance. Property owners whose
land is taken would be given “just compensation,” including for
lost profits or lost access.

The
constitutional amendment would most likely have prevented cities like
Norfolk, Virginia from taking
a thriving radio station from its owners and giving the land to Old
Dominion University, which had proposed no plans for the property.
The Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority declared the 78-year
old property of Central
Radio Company as “blighted,” along with more than 170 other
properties in the vicinity of the university. The owners fought back,
taking the city to court and hanging a 375-foot banner on their
building informing the public of the taking. The city responded by
citing the business for a sign code violation, asserting that only
60-foot or smaller signs are permitted. Hypocritically, Old Dominion
University has banners larger than the one in question.